I was a skeptic of Ball, mainly because he plays for UCLA and I think there's always bias with that. I think drafting someone because they're local and you see them play a lot is the worst possible reason to draft someone (reminds me of the story about Pacers fans being upset the Pacers took Reggie Miller instead of Steve Alford). And I think someone like Magic would be especially prone to falling into this pitfall.

But last night went a long way into turning me into a believer. If we wind up with #2, I wouldn't be upset at all drafting him. I'm also starting to see the "it" factor. He seems to always know what's going on and can make split second decisions to maximize it. And his post entries are so damn good...

How are we gonna draft another PG with Russell on the roster, Ball ain't coming off the bench with that giant ego of his and his dad won't allow it,

you move Dlo to SG
what do you think the last 5 games experimenting has been about

do you guys think that trainers at NBA level would make Lonzo revamp his shooting stroke?

Depends. Is it possible for him to pull up if he's going right with that form? Aside from that I don't have anything against it, aside from the disgust I experience whenever he shoots. Either way, he's shown he can get it off on athletic/big defenders and get it off quickly at that. Kevin Martin is obviously the first guy that comes to mind, but Ball gets it off even more quickly off the dribble. Martin had a slightly slower release, but compensated for that with his ability to draw fouls.

But then again, I'm in the camp that Lonzo is more of a streaky shooter than a pure shooter.

He struggles pulling up to his right and that is something he'll have to work on for sure but going to his left, that step back is pretty much unguardable.

I still don't understand how a guy who has consistently shot the ball extremely well over his entire freshman year is just on one long streak. That makes zero sense to me.

FT% is a relevant indicator of how well a player's shooting will translate from CBB to the pros (as we've seen firsthand with Ingram.) Justise Winslow also comes to mind as a recent example of that, who shot 49/42 at Duke, but 64% from the stripe, and look at his shooting in Miami.

The consensus (so far) top three prospects all have issues shooting FTs. It's concerning at the top of the draft.

Sure but Jackson and Fultz have such dynamic skillsets (Jackson can defend, is a playmaker defensively and offensively, fantastic athlete, rebounds well while Fultz is a dynamic offensive talent who's fantastic in the pick and roll, great at pulling up, variety of ways to score at the rim and projects to be a very good defender) that even if they don't translate to good spot up shooters they're still top tier prospects. Ball has a lot more concerns than those two so you NEED his shooting to translate if you want to put him on their level as prospects.

Ball doesn't have a dynamic skillset?

Passing? Sure.

Let's not get into the other stuff.

I've got a lot of questions still about his handles and getting off his shot at the NBA level.

but at the end of the day, despite all of these scoring deficiencies, his TS% is 67.9%....! He is a shockingly efficient scorer, albeit with a modest volume of shots compared to a scoring guard like Fultz. I don't see how this sort of freakish efficiency could be possible if he could only do one thing well in terms of scoring. The step back three is his best shot, but fewer than half of his points come from three point baskets. He shoots a...jesus..ridiculous 73.1% on two point baskets...smh wow. His efficiency is otherworldly.

Now, is he being extremely selective by only taking extremely efficient shots, particularly on the fast break? Sure. But I ask, isn't that a good thing for a pass first player? Especially when he still manages to score 15 ppg?

Now as far as his passing goes, when you say that his best passing is from a stand-still position, are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well? Please explain. I imagine screen and roll passing is included in this, but don't know what other types of passes you're talking about. I haven't studied his game in great detail, I've only seen a few vids, scouting reports, and his stats....which jump off the page, to say the very least.

So instead of worrying about all of the ways he can't get shots up, I can't help but be fixated on this: when he does get the shot up, it's probably going in!

I've seen Ball in only 5-7 games, and haven't watched any film on him
but, from what I've seen he does very well passing the ball on the fast break - very often in traffic.
I'd still take Fultz #1 if we get that pick, the level of dynamic scoring there is almost stratospheric_________________BI, PG13, Kuz, Ball: the future core
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI

a lot of posters here falling into recency bias and judging prospects based on their last game rather than the entirety of the season. if the player is consistently showing something that you didn't know they had then that's one thing, but i wouldn't be putting so much stock into "how good did they look in their last game" kind of analysis

That is a good point and I am certainly guilty of it, especially in the NCAA Tourney.

But to me, those games mean so much analytically because of how hotly contested they are. No team is coasting in a NCAA Tourney game, they are all going all out on defense which is why it is so fun to watch great players and teams being able to still score.

So recency bias comes into play, but the let's say UCLA vs Kentucky (next game!) is quite different than UCLA vs. Cal State Northridge in November._________________Love, Laker Lanny

but at the end of the day, despite all of these scoring deficiencies, his TS% is 67.9%....! He is a shockingly efficient scorer, albeit with a modest volume of shots compared to a scoring guard like Fultz. I don't see how this sort of freakish efficiency could be possible if he could only do one thing well in terms of scoring. The step back three is his best shot, but fewer than half of his points come from three point baskets. He shoots a...jesus..ridiculous 73.1% on two point baskets...smh wow. His efficiency is otherworldly.

Now, is he being extremely selective by only taking extremely efficient shots, particularly on the fast break? Sure. But I ask, isn't that a good thing for a pass first player? Especially when he still manages to score 15 ppg?

Now as far as his passing goes, when you say that his best passing is from a stand-still position, are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well? Please explain. I imagine screen and roll passing is included in this, but don't know what other types of passes you're talking about. I haven't studied his game in great detail, I've only seen a few vids, scouting reports, and his stats....which jump off the page, to say the very least.

To me, TS% is A LOT more believable for a dynamic player when they consistently create their own shots and it's with high volume.

His shot volume to me, is like a role player's shot volume. 53.2% of his shots are assisted at the rim. 35.7% of his 4.7 2-point field goal attempts are at the rim.

Basically, he takes 1.67 shots at the rim, per game. That's it. That's like, Nick Young level. Even then, one of those shots at the rim, is assisted by someone else's playmaking.

Contrast to Fultz, 61.6%FG at the rim, but only 17.4% of those shots at the rim, are actually assisted. 25.5% of his 12.5 2-point shots are at the rim.

Fultz takes 3.18 shots at the rim. Over 80% of the time, it's his own shot creation.

That's a FAR more translatable statistic across the board. It tells me that not only is he creating his own shots, but it's high volume AND he's still has NBA level efficiency at the rim.

Imagine if Fultz had 50% of his shots assisted at the rim. You don't think his FG% at the rim would skyrocket?

Just for a point of emphasis.
Fultz 17.4% assisted at the rim, 12.5% assisted 2-point, 55.8% assisted 3-point.

are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well?

Most of the time, it happens 2 different ways, the long-court transition pass, or moving the ball around within the halfcourt set, and just finding the open man. It's very high frequency.

But when you see him "drive and kick", that happens maybe, 2-3x per game, and no, I don't really count him driving across the free throw line to pass to a teammate a "drive and kick." It doesn't always draw the attention of the defense, and it's also a reflection why, even in limited volume, that he's not more effective with pocket passes out of PnR and more dynamic situations off-the-dribble.

You don't even have to watch a full game. Just count the number of assists that go to shooters.

Contrast to Fultz. Half his passes are drive and kick for assists.

All of this still boils down to my question marks with him as point of attack. Ball would find DLO in the corner with the next pass. Fultz, would draw in the defense off penetration and dish out. It all depends on what you like out of your PG.

I prefer the latter, because the numbers reflect him more as a scoring threat in the paint and a far more creative shot creator as an Iso player._________________Resident Car Nut.
Top 3 Pick: Fultz, Ball, TatumLAL ended w 3 of 4 guys of my '17 Draft list.
Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, DSJ, Monk, Markkanen, Collins, Kennard, Mitchell

but at the end of the day, despite all of these scoring deficiencies, his TS% is 67.9%....! He is a shockingly efficient scorer, albeit with a modest volume of shots compared to a scoring guard like Fultz. I don't see how this sort of freakish efficiency could be possible if he could only do one thing well in terms of scoring. The step back three is his best shot, but fewer than half of his points come from three point baskets. He shoots a...jesus..ridiculous 73.1% on two point baskets...smh wow. His efficiency is otherworldly.

Now, is he being extremely selective by only taking extremely efficient shots, particularly on the fast break? Sure. But I ask, isn't that a good thing for a pass first player? Especially when he still manages to score 15 ppg?

Now as far as his passing goes, when you say that his best passing is from a stand-still position, are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well? Please explain. I imagine screen and roll passing is included in this, but don't know what other types of passes you're talking about. I haven't studied his game in great detail, I've only seen a few vids, scouting reports, and his stats....which jump off the page, to say the very least.

To me, TS% is A LOT more believable for a dynamic player when they consistently create their own shots and it's with high volume.

His shot volume to me, is like a role player's shot volume. 53.2% of his shots are assisted at the rim. 35.7% of his 4.7 2-point field goal attempts are at the rim.

Basically, he takes 1.67 shots at the rim, per game. That's it. That's like, Nick Young level. Even then, one of those shots at the rim, is assisted by someone else's playmaking.

Contrast to Fultz, 61.6%FG at the rim, but only 17.4% of those shots at the rim, are actually assisted. 25.5% of his 12.5 2-point shots are at the rim.

Fultz takes 3.18 shots at the rim. Over 80% of the time, it's his own shot creation.

That's a FAR more translatable statistic across the board. It tells me that not only is he creating his own shots, but it's high volume AND he's still has NBA level efficiency at the rim.

Imagine if Fultz had 50% of his shots assisted at the rim. You don't think his FG% at the rim would skyrocket?

Quote:

are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well?

Most of the time, it happens 2 different ways, the long-court transition pass, or moving the ball around within the halfcourt set, and just finding the open man. It's very high frequency.

But when you see him "drive and kick", that happens maybe, 2-3x per game, and no, I don't really count him driving across the free throw line to pass to a teammate a "drive and kick." It doesn't always draw the attention of the defense, and it's also a reflection why, even in limited volume, that he's not more effective with pocket passes out of PnR and more dynamic situations off-the-dribble.

You don't even have to watch a full game. Just count the number of assists that go to shooters.

Contrast to Fultz. Half his passes are drive and kick for assists.

All of this still boils down to my question marks with him as point of attack. Ball would find DLO in the corner with the next pass. Fultz, would draw in the defense off penetration and dish out. It all depends on what you like out of your PG.

I prefer the latter, because the numbers reflect him more as a scoring threat in the paint and a far more creative shot creator as an Iso player.

I disagree but understand that POV. I think the type of player Lonzo is, is more valuable than Fultz in the system that Luke seems to be trying to implement.

I disagree but understand that POV. I think the type of player Lonzo is, is more valuable than Fultz in the system that Luke seems to be trying to implement.

I disagree with that, considering how many times Curry creates his own shots without even passing the ball at times, just to maintain pace.

I'd even argue that shot versatility is a requirement for the system that Luke wants to implement.

If it was a Laker player thing, I can only imagine Lonzo in a Nick Young role, shooting 3s and attacking closeouts, while Fultz would take Clarkson's shots, with more efficiency and better passing._________________Resident Car Nut.
Top 3 Pick: Fultz, Ball, TatumLAL ended w 3 of 4 guys of my '17 Draft list.
Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, DSJ, Monk, Markkanen, Collins, Kennard, Mitchell

but at the end of the day, despite all of these scoring deficiencies, his TS% is 67.9%....! He is a shockingly efficient scorer, albeit with a modest volume of shots compared to a scoring guard like Fultz. I don't see how this sort of freakish efficiency could be possible if he could only do one thing well in terms of scoring. The step back three is his best shot, but fewer than half of his points come from three point baskets. He shoots a...jesus..ridiculous 73.1% on two point baskets...smh wow. His efficiency is otherworldly.

Now, is he being extremely selective by only taking extremely efficient shots, particularly on the fast break? Sure. But I ask, isn't that a good thing for a pass first player? Especially when he still manages to score 15 ppg?

Now as far as his passing goes, when you say that his best passing is from a stand-still position, are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well? Please explain. I imagine screen and roll passing is included in this, but don't know what other types of passes you're talking about. I haven't studied his game in great detail, I've only seen a few vids, scouting reports, and his stats....which jump off the page, to say the very least.

To me, TS% is A LOT more believable for a dynamic player when they consistently create their own shots and it's with high volume.

His shot volume to me, is like a role player's shot volume. 53.2% of his shots are assisted at the rim. 35.7% of his 4.7 2-point field goal attempts are at the rim.

Basically, he takes 1.67 shots at the rim, per game. That's it. That's like, Nick Young level. Even then, one of those shots at the rim, is assisted by someone else's playmaking.

Contrast to Fultz, 61.6%FG at the rim, but only 17.4% of those shots at the rim, are actually assisted. 25.5% of his 12.5 2-point shots are at the rim.

Fultz takes 3.18 shots at the rim. Over 80% of the time, it's his own shot creation.

That's a FAR more translatable statistic across the board. It tells me that not only is he creating his own shots, but it's high volume AND he's still has NBA level efficiency at the rim.

Imagine if Fultz had 50% of his shots assisted at the rim. You don't think his FG% at the rim would skyrocket?

Quote:

are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well?

Most of the time, it happens 2 different ways, the long-court transition pass, or moving the ball around within the halfcourt set, and just finding the open man. It's very high frequency.

But when you see him "drive and kick", that happens maybe, 2-3x per game, and no, I don't really count him driving across the free throw line to pass to a teammate a "drive and kick." It doesn't always draw the attention of the defense, and it's also a reflection why, even in limited volume, that he's not more effective with pocket passes out of PnR and more dynamic situations off-the-dribble.

You don't even have to watch a full game. Just count the number of assists that go to shooters.

Contrast to Fultz. Half his passes are drive and kick for assists.

All of this still boils down to my question marks with him as point of attack. Ball would find DLO in the corner with the next pass. Fultz, would draw in the defense off penetration and dish out. It all depends on what you like out of your PG.

I prefer the latter, because the numbers reflect him more as a scoring threat in the paint and a far more creative shot creator as an Iso player.

I definitely see your point. Ultimately it comes down to Fultz as a guy with iso-gravity vs Ball as the quintessential, super-elite cog/glue guy/role player. But man, the latter is unique. There are plenty of guys like Fultz in today's NBA. Hell, we have one of them on our roster already! For curiosity's sake I hope we get the second pick and not the first, though I agree that Fultz is the more logical #1 overall.

The greatness of a team isn't simply the sum of its individual parts. Deep down in my gut I honestly think the team would perform better with Ball than Fultz. I think he's a better fit, which is of course a dirty word when talking about high draft picks.

Last edited by dao on Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:03 pm; edited 1 time in total

I disagree but understand that POV. I think the type of player Lonzo is, is more valuable than Fultz in the system that Luke seems to be trying to implement.

I disagree with that, considering how many times Curry creates his own shots without even passing the ball at times, just to maintain pace.

Where Ball will make a quick pass to get somebody an open shot or pull up for a quick 3(which he shoots efficiently) to maintain pace. I think his speed and ability to go downhill and get to the paint in transition is underrated as well. I highly doubt maintaining pace will be an issue for him. I actually think he'll be ELITE at controlling pace and it's a huge reason I have him #1.

I disagree but understand that POV. I think the type of player Lonzo is, is more valuable than Fultz in the system that Luke seems to be trying to implement.

I disagree with that, considering how many times Curry creates his own shots without even passing the ball at times, just to maintain pace.

I'd even argue that shot versatility is a requirement for the system that Luke wants to implement.

If it was a Laker player thing, I can only imagine Lonzo in a Nick Young role, shooting 3s and attacking closeouts, while Fultz would take Clarkson's shots, with more efficiency and better passing.

I just COMPLETELY disagree and think that's an inaccurate assessment of how he translates to the NBA. I've seen him do more than Young strictly off the ball. Then when you consider what he can do with the ball I don't think that is the role he'll play. I don't think there is a player on the roster who fills the role he will.

but at the end of the day, despite all of these scoring deficiencies, his TS% is 67.9%....! He is a shockingly efficient scorer, albeit with a modest volume of shots compared to a scoring guard like Fultz. I don't see how this sort of freakish efficiency could be possible if he could only do one thing well in terms of scoring. The step back three is his best shot, but fewer than half of his points come from three point baskets. He shoots a...jesus..ridiculous 73.1% on two point baskets...smh wow. His efficiency is otherworldly.

Now, is he being extremely selective by only taking extremely efficient shots, particularly on the fast break? Sure. But I ask, isn't that a good thing for a pass first player? Especially when he still manages to score 15 ppg?

Now as far as his passing goes, when you say that his best passing is from a stand-still position, are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well? Please explain. I imagine screen and roll passing is included in this, but don't know what other types of passes you're talking about. I haven't studied his game in great detail, I've only seen a few vids, scouting reports, and his stats....which jump off the page, to say the very least.

To me, TS% is A LOT more believable for a dynamic player when they consistently create their own shots and it's with high volume.

His shot volume to me, is like a role player's shot volume. 53.2% of his shots are assisted at the rim. 35.7% of his 4.7 2-point field goal attempts are at the rim.

Basically, he takes 1.67 shots at the rim, per game. That's it. That's like, Nick Young level. Even then, one of those shots at the rim, is assisted by someone else's playmaking.

Contrast to Fultz, 61.6%FG at the rim, but only 17.4% of those shots at the rim, are actually assisted. 25.5% of his 12.5 2-point shots are at the rim.

Fultz takes 3.18 shots at the rim. Over 80% of the time, it's his own shot creation.

That's a FAR more translatable statistic across the board. It tells me that not only is he creating his own shots, but it's high volume AND he's still has NBA level efficiency at the rim.

Imagine if Fultz had 50% of his shots assisted at the rim. You don't think his FG% at the rim would skyrocket?

Quote:

are you saying he's not a well rounded passer? That he can't pass on the move very well?

Most of the time, it happens 2 different ways, the long-court transition pass, or moving the ball around within the halfcourt set, and just finding the open man. It's very high frequency.

But when you see him "drive and kick", that happens maybe, 2-3x per game, and no, I don't really count him driving across the free throw line to pass to a teammate a "drive and kick." It doesn't always draw the attention of the defense, and it's also a reflection why, even in limited volume, that he's not more effective with pocket passes out of PnR and more dynamic situations off-the-dribble.

You don't even have to watch a full game. Just count the number of assists that go to shooters.

Contrast to Fultz. Half his passes are drive and kick for assists.

All of this still boils down to my question marks with him as point of attack. Ball would find DLO in the corner with the next pass. Fultz, would draw in the defense off penetration and dish out. It all depends on what you like out of your PG.

I prefer the latter, because the numbers reflect him more as a scoring threat in the paint and a far more creative shot creator as an Iso player.

I definitely see your point. Ultimately it comes down to Fultz as a guy with iso-gravity vs Ball as the quintessential, super-elite cog/glue guy/role player. But man, the latter is unique. There are plenty of guys like Fultz in today's NBA. Hell, we have one of them on our roster already! For curiosity's sake I hope we get the second pick and not the first, though I agree that Fultz is the more logical #1 overall.

The greatness of a team isn't simply the sum of its individual parts. Deep down in my gut I honestly think the team would perform better with Ball than Fultz. I think he's a better fit, which is of course a dirty word when talking about high draft picks.

The kid from Wichita State at PG, Landry Shamet is almost a Lonzo Ball-lite.

He isn't as good as ball, but he does some similar things and can certainly play._________________Love, Laker Lanny

I disagree but understand that POV. I think the type of player Lonzo is, is more valuable than Fultz in the system that Luke seems to be trying to implement.

I disagree with that, considering how many times Curry creates his own shots without even passing the ball at times, just to maintain pace.

I'd even argue that shot versatility is a requirement for the system that Luke wants to implement.

If it was a Laker player thing, I can only imagine Lonzo in a Nick Young role, hshooting 3s and attacking closeouts, while Fultz would take Clarkson's shots, with more efficiency and better passing.

I love Ball, really enjoy the way he is an efficient distributor and scorer with the usage of a role player, but Fultz has the superstar factor all over his game, you adapt a system to accommodate a player like him if he doesn't adapts to the system. Ball may be the most natural fit considering Dlo is a high usage player, but Fultz is just too good of a prospect to choose other player above him based on fit when you don't have a superstar able to create for himself